Russia speaks up...
Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:04 pm
Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:06 pm
I am impressed that the Russians would come out with that comment. It is a good sign.
Fri Jun 18, 2004 1:12 pm
Usually those guys wouldn't say "shit" if they had a mouthful.
A nice surprise.
A nice surprise.
Fri Jun 18, 2004 2:05 pm
There are two ways to look at this IMO:
1 Putin was coerced by Bush to say these things and they aren't true. This is difficult to deal with for Mr Bush's critics (in congress) however, since if they come out and call Putin a liar and all, it risks offending Russia, which is something that we don't really want to do if it can be helped, and they know this.
2 Putin is telling the truth. This is also a difficult situation for Mr Bush's critics, because it means that the President is (gasp!) actually trying to do his job and protect america from further terrorist activity. This is not the idea they want to promote.
I don't know about this whole 9/11 commission business, it's supposed to be bipartisan, but everything I hear out of it is very negative to the President and the administration, and no one else it seems. I'm not sure if this is due to the reporting or what... but it doesn't seem bipartisan to me
Relating to Casus' earlier thread: I wonder who the terrorists would rather have in power? I've heard many rumors about them planning terrorist acts near the election in order to attempt to affect the outcome in november. Similar to what happened in Spain with the train bombings...
Now, why is it they would want someone besides Bush in office? Something to think about, when casting your vote.
1 Putin was coerced by Bush to say these things and they aren't true. This is difficult to deal with for Mr Bush's critics (in congress) however, since if they come out and call Putin a liar and all, it risks offending Russia, which is something that we don't really want to do if it can be helped, and they know this.
2 Putin is telling the truth. This is also a difficult situation for Mr Bush's critics, because it means that the President is (gasp!) actually trying to do his job and protect america from further terrorist activity. This is not the idea they want to promote.
I don't know about this whole 9/11 commission business, it's supposed to be bipartisan, but everything I hear out of it is very negative to the President and the administration, and no one else it seems. I'm not sure if this is due to the reporting or what... but it doesn't seem bipartisan to me
Relating to Casus' earlier thread: I wonder who the terrorists would rather have in power? I've heard many rumors about them planning terrorist acts near the election in order to attempt to affect the outcome in november. Similar to what happened in Spain with the train bombings...
Now, why is it they would want someone besides Bush in office? Something to think about, when casting your vote.
Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:20 pm
Eh... doesn't matter... see how much play this gets on American press. It'll be forgotten in a couple weeks.
Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:26 pm
Originally posted by Rule of Wrist
I wonder who the terrorists would rather have in power?
I doubt think the terrorists would want either Kerry nor Bush. They would prefer someone like Nader or something similar. Both Bush and Kerry have clearly stated that they do not plan on removing troops from Iraq so I don't see how a terrorist attack near election day would bring in a president that would go easy on Al-Qaeda. The only way they would be pleased is with a third-party candidate, whose chances of winning in America, are negligble.
-Bagginses